On Taking a Chance with The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

A director who dropped out, a troubled production, a controversial casting choice and a more controversial image; these are the just some of the pre-release headlines that surrounded The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Such stories cannot have been welcome news for fans of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy (2001 – 2003).

Yet, when you look closer at the news it was never that bad. The director who dropped out, Guillermo Del Toro (it would have been fascinating to see his take on Tolkien) was replaced by Jackson himself, who had already brought Middle Earth to such incredible realisation before. The troubled production involved pay disputes in New Zealand and were quickly resolved. Martin Freeman would have to wait till the film’s release to prove any critics wrong and the image, the controversial image… a brand new high definition 3D, shot for IMAX and, uniquely in 48 frames per second, twice what other feature films offer! Yet, is this, a CGI reliant, epic adventure film not exactly the type of film with which to experiment with? Such experiments are not for Ken Loach films to which serious film criticism is applied. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is film as film was intended: pure, unadulterated, magical fun. Just as audiences wondered at the spectacle of Melies, so will audiences marvel at feat Jackson has achieved here, for this is no less an experiment in cinema. An experiment worth celebrating.

At 48 frames per second The Hobbit is a unique experience and even seasoned cinemagoers may find the image at first unsettling. The sharpness of the scene is incredible and more akin to a BBC nature documentary than a feature film. The close ups reveal such detail it is almost intrusive. This could be that the first 30 minutes of the film are set in the claustrophobic hobbit hole, heightening the realism as it closes off space. However, the eye soon adjusts (if only the same were true of 3D) and when it does, Jackson’s choice to film in 48 pays off. As The Hobbit relies so much on CGI, the quicker frame rate blurs the distinction between real and imaged. This results in less of those ‘computer game sequences’ that plagued The Two Towers (2002) and The Return of the King (2003). In fact, the concluding scene of The Hobbit, involving giant eagles, is so majestic in its realism and cinematography that you could swear you were present.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is an excellent addition to the Middle Earth canon that Jackson is creating. Not as accomplished as The Fellowship of the Ring, but equal to the others. Freeman excels as Bilbo and the dwarf clan are increasingly engaging. This is a film of tremendous fun and does not feel its 160 minutes in any way. Yet, even with all its expensive technology and high definition image, The Hobbit can still not solve the issues of 3D, but it does make the case for IMAX.